Who's going to win the Belmonnt?

[Double_Jay]

double jay- I base my comments on the work which comes out of the speed sheets. If you are not familiar with them you can go to this website and look at their race of the week, the belmont stakes, it is free and it provides great insight into a horses actual performance. When you get to AA's sheet you will see a definite pattern this year of good race followed by poor race. The horse which ran the fastest race doesn't always win but I hope you already knew that. There are many variables that contribute to a win, post position, track variant, wind, track condition, weight carried, ground loss, dead rail, etc, etc. The website is www.thorograph.com. Feel free to ask me any questions after you have looked at this site and I will try to answer them for you. I have been using the sheets for over 15 years and consider myself a fairly good handicapper.

I think it may be a question of semantics with me, not numbers. I'm not a bettor, in that I never wager, so I don't pay any attention to the sheets or the Beyers, except for comparison purposes among a field or class of horses only.

When I think of a horse bouncing, I think of it as putting in a poor effort, throwing in a clunker. Alex doesn't do that (his Rebel when he was sick is a throwout). Have you ever seen Alex putting in a poor effort? No matter what his numbers say, the horse just doesn't run clunkers. He always gives 100+ %. He's as consistent as the day is long. When has Alex ever been off form? That's not a bouncer. [/u]

Just my opinion, of course, but it's a very strong opinion.

[bcassidy]

Double Jay--I guess it is a matter of semantics, Alex is a tremendous competitor but I am speaking about nuances that probably don't concern you. He is a great horse and I hope he becomes a great sire. Respectfully Brendan.

[pistol]

Some peoples definition of a bounce is when they run a lower figure. I don't agree with that. A horse won't run the exact same everytime, and if not, it has to go up or down. Also, it cannot continue to go up each time.

[Sam]

Some peoples definition of a bounce is when they run a lower figure. I don't agree with that. A horse won't run the exact same everytime, and if not, it has to go up or down. Also, it cannot continue to go up each time.

There is bouncing and there is regressing.

Regressing to me is going from a 102 to a 99. BOUNCING is when you go from a 108 to a 99. 3 points is a regression. 9 points is a bounce (barring track surfaces, obviously you will run a much lower number if the next race is in the slop).

Fine, he had a lung infection (or whatever) that caused him to 'bounce' in the Rebel. What was his excuse in the Derby?

[bcassidy]

Pistol---Older horses develop definite form cycles, if you don't know what I am speaking about I can probably refer you to some websites. Whenever a horse reaches a new top effort in a form cycle, that horse, if not given a sufficient amount of recuperative time between that new top and their next start can bounce. Therefore a bounce is a negative reaction to a new top effort. Afleet Alex had new tops in both the Arkansas and Preakness (as Sam has pointed out), based upon how he had reacted to his previous tops ---it was entirely possible that the combination of a bounce and the extra distance would have led to a subpar performance in the Belmont. Most horses would have bounced but not all do (especially young 3 yr olds-- still developing. Some like Alex move right on forward to create a new top, it is not very common but still happens fairly regularly) Bounce or not, Afleet Alex is one heck of a race horse. Let's enjoy him for the rest of the year. He certainly won't be racing next year.

[bcassidy]

Sam--one possible explanation for the Derby performance was the dead rail at CD. If in fact that was the reason he didn't win the derby, what a shame---- to have prevented a TC winner from us this year because of a track aberation.

[sb]

Sam--one possible explanation for the Derby performance was the dead rail at CD. If in fact that was the reason he didn't win the derby, what a shame---- to have prevented a TC winner from us this year because of a track abberation.

That's what sets of the real Triple Crown winners from those who faulter in one. My 'guestimate' is that the connections weren't all that convinced of Afleet Alex' ability to win the Derby, and that Rose just didn't ride him 'tactically' enough. He surely did so in the other races, and the results are history. I would dare say that Afleet Alex is definitely a Triple Crown horse, lol. Whatever will happen to him from now on has probably all to do with money. Either that, or the stressful campaign might have taken too much out of him which I personally doubt. He seems like a sounder horse than Ghostzapper, and *I* believe it has much do do with his trainer who knows the horse so well. He's said on several occasions that the training regime he's following with Afleet Alex is a personalized one and that not every horse would withstand those vigorous gallops over long miles. He's don Interval training with him. What would interest me also is what kind of feeding protocol Afleet Alex is on.
A word about Secretariat: let's not forget that Somethingroyal was a 'royal' broodmare which produced many other outstanding race horses and also one very notable sire in Sir Gaylord. Secretariat also enjoyed the privilege of one of the best trainers of all times. Yet, in the end, Secretariat WAS a surprise, even to his professional connections. I think something quite similar has happened to Afleet Alex under different circumstances. The pressures are much higher today than they were then for both horses and trainers. Jockeys are probably exposed to the same stuff, more or less. Donno, lol.

SB